By the Court.—The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order of Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow dated 11.4.2001 whereby the OA which was registered as TA No. 1949 of 1997 has been dismissed. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing of the impugned orders dated 12.9.1985 and 20.9.1985 regarding the reversion of the petitioner. The petitioner further seeks quashing of the seniority list dated 27.9.1984 and 11.1.1985 and has prayed for mandate to opposite parties to maintain the seniority of the petitioner vis-a-vis respondent Nos. 4 and 5 as per letter dated 2.7.1979.

2. Brief facts giving rise to the instant petition are that the petitioner and the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 alongwith 40 others were selected by the Railway Service Commission Board, Allahabad for the post of Enquiry-Cum-Reservation Clerk in short ‘ERC’ in the grade of Rs. 330-560/-. The selected candidates were sent for induction training at Chandausi Training Centre between 21.8.1978 to 18.10.1978. On successful completion of the training in view of the Rule 303 Clause-A of Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM-vol-I), the petitioner was placed at serial No. 10 whereas respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were placed at serial Nos. 19 and 20 respectively. The petitioner has contended that the seniority of all ERCs was maintained at zonal level. The petitioner was posted at Delhi railway station on the post of ERC while respondent Nos. 4 and 5 joined at NDCR, New Delhi and thus the petitioner and the opposite party Nos. 4 and 5 were posted in one zonal railway. Due to some personal reasons the petitioner sought her transfer from Delhi to Lucknow and was transferred in view of her request vide order dated 12.12.1979. Pursuant to the order, the petitioner joined at Lucknow on 1.1.1980. The petitioner has further contended that the post of ERC grade-III in pay-scale 330-560/- was restructured as ERC grade-II in pay-scale 425-640/- vide letter of General Manger (P) Northern Railway dated 11.1.1985 and the petitioner was also placed in the 425-640 grade after the transfer of the petitioner from Delhi to Lucknow. The seniority list of ERCs was published on 27.9.1984 in which the petitioner was placed at serial No. 549 while respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were placed at serial Nos. 396 and 397 respectively. It has been contended that seniority list shows that there was a common cadre of all ERCs at zonal level and the seniority of the petitioner vis-a-vis respondent Nos. 4 and 5 was wrongly decided. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 later on pleaded that since the petitioner was transferred on her own request as such her seniority was to be fixed at the bottom of the cadre, but the same plea is not sustainable because there was one seniority list based on zonal level and even on the transfer of the petitioner on request her seniority could not have been affected. It is also stated that on 29.1.1985. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 also managed their transfer from NDCR Delhi to Lucknow and another seniority list dated 11.1.1985 was prepared but was not published or circulated due to restructuring of the cadre from grade-III to grade-II. In this list also petitioner was placed in the bottom at serial No. 227 whereas respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were shown at Serial Nos. 99 and 100. The petitioner further contends that the seniority of ERCs was maintained on the zonal level and it was a centralized post under the direct control of General Manager, Northern Railway, New Delhi and vide order dated 19.8.1985, the cadre was decentralised at divisional railway level and was placed under the direct administrative control of Divisional Railway Manager. Before 19.8.1985 the petitioner and also respondent Nos. 4 and 5 had been transferred to Lucknow Division and seniority on the basis of merit after training was maintained. Copy of the merit list of 2.1.1979 has been filed as Annexure 8 to the writ petition. Subsequently, vide order dated 12.9.1985, t